Also, i am a lawyer; Doctor of jurisprudence ( in the Lewis Henry Morgan lawyerly tradition ). Academically, theoretically, historically , jurisprudence is as important as philosophy.

I discovered it's no accident that modern science is a structural transform of law. The centrality of natural LAWS in science is because science uses a modified jurisprudential model. Law is a materialism ; only material evidence is used to _prove_ facts. There are theories. Etc. etc

Then I did work on a land recovery law case for the Yurok of Northern California as a law student . It was sort of my field work from anthro career , too. Wrote "Indigenous Knowledge in Aboriginal Land Recovery " as summary essay of my theoretical conclusions as Ethnology bachelor and masters; legal research paper on land recovery for "Indians" ( as they called themselves ) while on the res in National Lawyers Guild Summer project 1978. ; paper on Yurok Social Philosophy and Land Concepts. Basic thesis is based on Morgan: Societas concepts of land are not Civitas concepts of territory and private property , therefore no meeting of the minds when whites "bought" the land from them ; void the contracts . Of course, ain't gonna happen. So, my practice had shifted to arouse the urban proletariat , win socialism , and we'll give reparations to Indigenous Peoples.

Science is a legal metaphor "Last week, Neil deGrasse Tyson offered up the perfect example of scientism when he proposed a country of #Rationalia, in which “all policy shall be based on the weight of evidence.” --- We already have that. It's called a nation of laws. Law is materialist; no supernatural beings can be relied upon as witnesses or causes. Science is actually based on the legal metaphor. Thus it is fundamentally a collection of natural _laws_. It decides based on objective, material evidence. It proves things based on standards of evidence . It got all that from jurisprudence.